Search

The mission of policing is “to protect and serve,” but recent events suggest that many Americans, and especially Black Americans, do not feel protected from the police. Understanding police-related fear is important because it may impact civilians’ health, daily lives, and policy attitudes. To examine the prevalence, sources, and consequences of both personal and altruistic fear of the police, we surveyed a nationwide sample (N = 1,150), which included comparable numbers of Black (N = 517) and White (N = 492) respondents. Most White respondents felt safe, but most Black respondents lived in fear of the police killing them and hurting their family members. About half of Black respondents preferred to be robbed or burglarized than to have unprovoked contact with officers. The racial divide in fear was mediated by past experiences with police mistreatment. In turn, fear mediated the effects of race and past mistreatment on support for police defunding and intentions to have “the talk” with family youths about the need to distrust and avoid officers. The deep American racial divide in police-related fear represents a racially disparate health crisis and a primary obstacle to law enforcement’s capacity to serve all communities equitably.

The gun ownership literature is vast, with dozens of studies seeking to explain who owns guns and why. We build on this literature in two key ways. First, we introduce a new variable into the fold: moral concern about harming others. We theorize that this concern actively inhibits gun ownership. Second, we direct theoretical and empirical attention to a predictor of gun ownership that has frequently been overlooked in the contemporary gun literature: childhood socialization. Using data from a national sample of 1,100 adults, we find that moral concerns about harm represent a barrier to gun ownership and limit the number of guns people own. By contrast, childhood socialization has the opposite effect. Furthermore, we find that childhood socialization is not only the strongest predictor of owning guns but also fully mediates the relationship between gender and gun ownership.

Beginning in the 1970s, the United States began an experiment in mass imprisonment. Supporters argued that harsh punishments such as imprisonment reduce crime by deterring inmates from reof...

Far-right domestic terrorism is a major threat to US national security. Despite this reality, conservative policymakers have downplayed the threat of right-wing violence while arguing that far-left violence (from groups like Antifa) is a more pressing concern. Drawing on attribution theory and research on politically motivated reasoning, we suggest that politics constrain the American public’s understanding of terrorism by shaping casual attributions for it. Using data from an experiment within a national survey (n = 700), we examine how political views moderate attributions made for the actions of far-right, far-left, and Islamist terrorism. We find that causal attributions for terrorism depend on the type of terrorist considered, with external attributions (motivated by injustice or oppression) endorsed most strongly for Islamist terrorists and internal attributions (motivated by hate or evil) endorsed most strongly for far-right terrorists. Furthermore, political views moderate this effect such that people believe terrorism committed by politically aligned groups is motivated less by the internal characteristics of the terrorists and more by external factors. Taken together, these findings may help to explain partisan differences in moral outrage over politically motivated terrorism.

Edward J. Latessa has had a multifaceted influence on the field of criminal justice over a remarkable career that has spanned more than four decades. He has been instrumental in building the School...

Based on a March 28–29, 2020 MTurk survey (N = 1,000), the current study examined how faith in President Donald Trump’s statements downplaying the risks and his responsibility for the COVID-19 pand...

Most Black Americans are afraid of the police. This fear is consequential, adversely affecting their health, social lives, school performance, willingness to call the police, and interactions with officers. Improving police-civilian relations and reducing Black Americans’ fear is therefore critical. Among the most prominently proposed policing reforms is police racial and gender diversification. However, there is little experimental evidence about the effects of officer diversity, and the existing non-experimental evidence is mixed. Using a nationwide sample (N = 1,100) that included comparable numbers of Black and non-Black respondents (N = 511 and 589, respectively), we tested the effects of officer diversity in two methodologically dissimilar survey experiments, producing four key findings. First, in early 2022, nearly two years after George Floyd’s killing, most Black Americans remained afraid of the police. Second, in a conjoint experiment where respondents were presented with 11,000 officer profiles that randomly varied on seven attributes, including race and sex, Black Americans were less afraid when the officers were non-White (Black or Hispanic/Latino) instead of White and were female instead of male. Third, in a separate experiment with pictured police teams wherein each officer’s race and sex were randomized, Black Americans were less afraid of being mistreated by non-White and female officers. Finally, experimental evidence emerged that body-worn cameras (BWC), when civilians were aware of them, reduced fear of the police among both Black and non-Black respondents. These findings strongly support calls to diversify police agencies and to require officers to wear and notify civilians of BWC.

This study presents a comprehensive assessment of what Millennials think about U.S. correctional policy. Using a 2017 national-level sample ( N = 1,000), Millennials’ correctional policy opinions across 13 outcomes are assessed and compared to the views of other generations. The main findings are twofold. First, Millennials are only modestly punitive but clearly supportive of progressive policies. Thus, Millennials favor a rehabilitative correctional orientation, believe in offender redeemability, and prefer policies to protect ex-felons’ civil rights and to expunge criminal records for minor offenses. Second, generational differences in public support for correctional policies are mostly limited. Americans of all generations tend to endorse inclusionary policies—a finding indicating that the future of American corrections might see a lengthy era of progressive reform.

Public reporting programs such as the “See Something, Say Something” campaign are important counterterrorism measures. Yet public knowledge about terrorism is low, and Americans tend to associate t...

COVID-19 has had unprecedented effects on populations around the world Given the political context of the pandemic and the nation’s response to it, this study sought to assess the extent of Americans’ personal fear about the virus as well as their fear for others (altruistic fear), identify potential predictors of these fears, and examine the mental health impact of heightened COVID-19 fears Overall, a majority of respondents worried about various aspects of the virus, from being exposed to dying, and reported often worrying about others, including family, the elderly, and healthcare professionals Building on the fear of crime literature, we find that certain individuals, including those who believe they are at a high risk of dying from the virus, non-Whites, and those who closely follow news coverage of the pandemic, are likely to experience elevated fear and, possibly, its consequences [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Sociological Spectrum is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use This abstract may be abridged No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract (Copyright applies to all Abstracts )

Ransomware attacks have become a critical security threat worldwide. However, existing research on ransomware has largely ignored public opinion. This initial study identifies patterns in the American public's support for the use of ransomware, specifically when it is framed to provide benefits to others (i.e., in-group members). Drawing on the Robin Hood decision-making literature and Moral Foundations Theory, we offer theoretical predictions regarding ransomware support.In a survey of 1013 Americans, we embedded a split-ballot experiment in which respondents were randomly assigned to indicate their level of support or opposition to one of two sets of six ransomware scenarios. We manipulated the nationality, authority level, and political affiliation of the actors.We find that people are more supportive of ransomware use when the actors are from their own in-group, and the outcomes benefit their in-group members. Also, the more strongly participants endorsed the moral foundations of authority and harm/care, the more supportive they were of the use of ransomware that may benefit others from their in-group.These findings suggest political actors may be able to generate public support for morally questionable actions by emphasizing in-group benefits and the Robin Hood nature of an attack (e.g., outcome-based morality).

Is there a “crime gene”? This question has been answered by the scientific community, and the response is a definitive “no.” Yet, it is unclear whether this information has been communicated to the general public. Furthermore, it is unclear whether people’s views about the genetics of crime influence their perceptions of the way offenders should be treated. This study uses attribution theory to understand how perceptions of the role of genetic factors in criminal behavior influence beliefs about the punishment, redeemability, and rehabilitation of offenders. Drawing on a national sample of White respondents (N = 392), this study finds that only a small proportion believe there is a single crime gene. Compared to other respondents, those who believe crime is caused by a single gene believe that punishment should be weakened, are less supportive of rehabilitation efforts, and believe that offenders are less capable of redemption. Implications of these findings are discussed.

As a candidate and as president, Donald Trump heightened the salience of immigration, portraying those crossing the nation’s Southern border as “bad hombres” and advocating building a wall blocking their access to the United States from Mexico. Based on a 2019 MTurk study of 465 White adults, the current study found that a clear majority of respondents rejected this stereotype of Southern immigrants as “bad hombres,” judging them to be just as law-abiding as Americans. Importantly, however, the analysis revealed that two innovative measures—Hispanic resentment and, in particular, White nationalism—were consistently related to perceptions of immigrants as criminogenic. Given the growing demographic diversity of the United States, future research should consider the increasing influence of racial/ethnic resentment and White group identity on public opinions about immigration and other justice issues.

Objectives: The recurring mass murder of students in schools has sparked an intense debate about how best to increase school safety. Because public opinion weighs heavily in this debate, we examine public views on how best to prevent school shootings. We theorize that three moral-altruistic factors are likely to be broadly relevant to public opinion on school safety policies: moral intuitions about harm, anger about school crime, and altruistic fear. Methods: We commissioned YouGov to survey 1,100 Americans to explore support for a range of gun control and school programming policies and willingness to pay for school target hardening. We test the ability of a moral-altruistic model to explain public opinion, while controlling for the major predictors of gun control attitudes found in the social sciences. Results: The public strongly supports policies that restrict who can access guns, expand school anti-bullying and counseling programs, and target-harden schools. While many factors influence attitudes toward gun-related policies specifically, moral-altruistic factors significantly increase support for all three types of school safety policies. Conclusions: The public favors a comprehensive policy response and is willing to pay for it. Support for prevention efforts reflects moral intuitions about harm, anger about school crime, and altruistic fear.

Although the risk of dying in a terrorist attack in the United States is almost non-existent, recent polls indicate that Americans rank terrorism as a top national concern, prioritizing it over other issues such as the economy, health care, and the environment. The current study examines how Americans are impacted by the threat of terrorism today. Analyses of original national survey data suggest that Americans currently engage in behavioral coping in response to the threat of terrorism, and their coping responses vary by levels of worry about terrorism, political orientation, emotional vulnerability, and the association that they make between Muslims and terrorism. The observed behavioral adaptations have implications for community engagement, the economy, and psychological well-being on an individual level.

Following Cullen’s spirit when setting forth his version of social support theory, this article shows the value of social support as an organizing concept for life-course theory. Specifically, this article describes four different pathways through which social support matters for desistance. First, social support is a constitutive part of adults’ social bonds that operate as resources that make change possible in individuals’ lives. Second, social support can promote and help sustain a cognitive transformation that encourages desistance. Third, socially supportive interventions are better equipped to promote desistance, whereas punishment-oriented interventions (those lacking and undermining social supports) are criminogenic. Finally, social support can help former inmates navigate the many stressors they encounter upon release and contribute to sustaining their desistance. This article reaffirms the value of social support as a fundamental factor in the desistance process. A social support theory of desistance could help integrate much of the criminological research on desistance. Furthermore, putting social support at the center of the discussion of the desistance process would help consolidate a policy agenda that not only reaffirms rehabilitation but also promotes a broader set of policies aimed at constructing a more fair and supportive society. In doing so, it will move the debate away from individuals and make governmental institutions and society as a whole acknowledge their responsibility in the crime problem and their role in promoting desistance.

From Columbine to Sandy Hook to Marjory Stoneman Douglas, the American public has repeatedly witnessed the carnage and tragic consequences of mass school shootings. Using a national survey of Ameri...

Given the historically contentious relationship – including most notably the use of excessive and lethal force – between the police and African Americans, the current project examines the extent to...

In 2009, Maruna and King presented results from a British survey showing that the public’s belief in the redeemability of people who committed offenses curbed their level of punitiveness. Based on a 2017 national survey in the United States ( n = 1,000), the current study confirms that redeemability is negatively related to punitive attitudes. In addition, the analyses reveal that this belief predicts support for rehabilitation and specific inclusionary policies (i.e., ban-the-box in employment, expungement of criminal records, and voting rights for people with a felony conviction). Findings regarding measures for punishment and rehabilitation were confirmed by a 2019 Mechanical Turk (MTurk) survey. These results suggest that beliefs about capacity for change among people who committed offenses are key to understanding crime-control public policy.

Prior studies of staff-inmate interactions suggest that they are primarily adversarial in nature. However, less is known about the key factors that influence inmate-staff relationships. Using a sam...

A number of homeland security measures have been implemented or proposed since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. While public opinion polls suggest that some of these measures (e.g., uni...

In recent years, India has been marked by highly publicized cases of rape that have led to public outcry and demands for rape-law reform and the protection of women. In this context, the purpose of...

School shootings are one of the most salient social problems in America. Most prior research in this area has focused on identifying their causes and evaluating preventive school safety measures. A...

School violence is a significant social concern. To better understand its sources, a comprehensive meta-analysis of the school violence and victimization literature was undertaken. Across 761 studies, the relative effects of 30 different individual, school, and community level correlates were assessed (8,790 effect size estimates). Violence and victimization were conceptualized broadly to include various forms of aggression and crime at school. The results revealed that the strongest correlates of school violence perpetration were antisocial behavior, deviant peers, antisocial attitudes, victimization, and peer rejection; and that the strongest correlates of school victimization were prior/other victimization, social competence, risk avoidance, antisocial behavior, and peer rejection. Extracurricular activities and school security devices had among the weakest associations in the meta-analysis, and several traditional criminological predictors did not perform well in the school context. We conclude with recommendations for theory, future research, and policy.

Current reform efforts have called for police to engage in the use of procedural justice to build trust between the police and community. However, research in this area has employed highly heterogeneous measures of procedural justice, a practice potentially inhibiting the systematic accumulation of knowledge. To address this issue, this study develops two measures of procedural justice (a 16-item and 10-item scale) by following standard psychometric principles, including a systematic review of previously used items, four iterative surveys to narrow the pool of items, classical test theory, and item response theory. Beyond developing scales to be used in policing research, the analysis serves as a case study in “criminometrics,” arguing that the measurement of core constructs in criminology generally should be based on psychometric principles.

What impact does formal punishment have on antisocial conduct—does it deter or promote it? The findings from a long line of research on the labeling tradition indicate formal punishments have the opposite‐of‐intended consequence of promoting future misbehavior. In another body of work, the results show support for deterrence‐based hypotheses that punishment deters future misbehavior. So, which is it? We draw on a nationally representative sample of British adolescent twins from the Environmental Risk (E‐Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study to perform a robust test of the deterrence versus labeling question. We leverage a powerful research design in which twins can serve as the counterfactual for their co‐twin, thereby ruling out many sources of confounding that have likely impacted prior studies. The pattern of findings provides support for labeling theory, showing that contact with the justice system—through spending a night in jail/prison, being issued an anti‐social behaviour order (ASBO), or having an official record—promotes delinquency. We conclude by discussing the impact these findings may have on criminologists’ and practitioners’ perspective on the role of the juvenile justice system in society.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand the reporting intentions of traditional and cybercrime victimization, and the role of procedural justice in explaining sources of variation. Design/methodology/approach Using Amazon’s MTurk program for opt-in survey participation, 534 respondents across the USA considered ten victimization incidents and expressed their likelihood of reporting each incident to the police as well as their belief that the police would identify and arrest the offender. Findings As expected, reporting intentions increased with the seriousness of the incident for both traditional crime and cybercrime. However, reporting intentions were generally slightly higher for incidents that occurred in the physical world, as opposed to online. Likewise, beliefs that police could identify and arrest and offender were lower for cybercrime compared to traditional crime. Consistently, predictors of reporting to the police and belief in police effectiveness hinged heavily on procedural justice. Other predictors for these behaviors and beliefs are also discussed. Originality/value This study uniquely compares reporting intentions of potential victims of parallel victimizations occurring in-person and online, thus providing firm comparisons about reporting intentions and beliefs about police effectiveness in addressing traditional and cybercrime.

Based on a 2017 national survey of 1,000 Black Americans, perceptions regarding the implications of Donald Trump’s election as President on race relations, police-minority relations, and police tre...